A Conversation About Culture - Series 6 EP 06

In this last episode of this series, Claire and Oliver reflect on the insights gained.  They speak about the impact that culture has on diversity, through the lens of a diversity study with a difference. They also explore the impact of the Billable Hour on culture. Is this the elephant in the room that needs to change before anything else can work?

The Lawyer's Coach is brought to you by Client Talk and Hansard Coaching.

Transcript

0:02

Hello, and welcome to the lawyers coach podcast. This is the final episode of Series six. And we're doing things a little bit differently. Instead of bringing in a guest, our normal hosts, Claire racing and Oliver Hansard, both of whom are coaches and former lawyers have been interviewing each other, the theme of this series has been culture. And there'll be speaking about the impact that culture has on diversity through the lens of a study with a difference. We'll also explore the impact of the billable hour on culture, is this the elephant in the room that needs to change before anything else can work? Here's Oliver to kick things off. To Claire, I've just put down your class of 2002 report, which looks at where the intake that you were part of Herbert Smith, free hills, where their careers have gone since then, fascinating read, we'd love to understand the genesis of that report and where the idea came from and how the projects emerged. Yeah, so I think it probably started over a glass of wine. The best ideas, the best ideas always do. So yeah, I was chatting to my other half. And we were reflecting on you know, we both started in in very different environments, I started life in the Lord, my husband started life in the Foreign Office. And we were reflecting on, you know, 20 years ago, when we both started, you know, there was a big drive towards making sure that the numbers that they were seeing at kind of intake level were going to be reflected through at leadership level. So in the context of of my intake in partnership roles. So I thought, you know, actually, it's quite interesting to see what had happened to the intake that I started with, and went online, did a bit of research on LinkedIn. And what I was seeing was pretty concerning, because actually, lots of the women that I remembered, hadn't made, and we'll talk about whether whether you've made it or not when you get to partner, but lots of the women not in partnership positions and the men that I remembered, you know, we're in partner roles. So I thought, Well, it'd be interesting to actually get the full data set, because my memory, my memory was probably failing me to see you know, what happened. And Herbert Smith Freehills were very generous, and they helped me remember the, the full dataset, and off I went, and yeah, the numbers were pretty, pretty shocking. So we started off around 57% female. And we ended up with 73% of that intake saying in the law stowing and fee earning roles, with a roughly equal gender split. And normally here, and I'm talking to someone, I asked them, what they think the numbers were, but you read it. So yeah, so I can't tell you, I can't get you to guess. But only 23% of the women were hitting that highest level. So why the partner or GC versus 59% of the men, which you know, and I cut the data in different ways. But whichever way I cut the data, there was this big divide between women who had hit that highest level and the men. And the key drivers of that difference. The two main reasons come back to culture. One of those reasons was this always on culture, you know, which we can we can discuss. And then the other one, which for me, was also something that linked to culture. So I think often with culture, we think about how we do things around here. But I think in law firms, because of the way that they're set up, because their partnership models, you know, the partners are very much part of the culture. I mean, you know, we often say that culture comes from the top. And I think who does things around here is really important when we think about partnerships. So what I what I did, I I asked people to identify traits that they saw in themselves. Both and I kind of split it male and female, I split it partner, a non partner. And I also asked people to identify traits that they saw in, in their leaders. And the results were interesting. So the traits that people identified in themselves, friendly, collaborative, intelligent, probably not surprising being being lawyers in a city firm, focused relationship building. The difference actually, because men and women identify very similar traits. women tended to say empathy. As one of the traits that they identified, and men identified as being logical in a way that the women didn't put that in there, kind of top top five, top 10. But what was interesting was when we started thinking about partners, and some of the words here were words that people didn't necessarily identifying themselves. So words like ambitious, and assertive and competitive. And I think these are words that, you know, can be difficult words for women to associate with, especially this this assertive word where there's lots of research around the impact of, you know, kind of women are penalized for being assertive in the workplace. And, and what was interesting to me, and something that I've kind of had many conversations since the report, and I've reflected on this, and why are these words, ones that we assess associate with partners? And, and for me, I think, you know, they are words that are needed, perhaps, in a culture where, you know, this 24/7, you know, the more you build, the better you are culture, I think that they are linked. So for me, you know, culture plays a big part in all of this. And, you know, we've had, Chris, this series talking about mental health and the impact, you know, mental health in the profession, we've had Elizabeth talking about burnout, and how there are different points, pinch points in people's careers where that comes through. So, for me, I think, you know, this inequality that we see at the top still is just one symptom of something bigger choice seems to come into it as well, and that men and women have different choices and ranges of choices they can make during their career, did you see that as a significant impact on on routes people took? Yeah, so that was, that was, I guess, one of the things that surprised me. So I kind of went through and, you know, found what I found. But when I was talking to people and I spoke to lots of women, I spoke to lots of men, I spoke to lots of coaches who coach leaders. And one of the things that was interesting was that I really noticed a difference between women who perhaps had decided to, you know, stop at senior associate level, or perhaps were in house and, you know, didn't want to kind of carry on through to GC. And they were quite happy with the choices that they had made. And, you know, they recognize that they have to make a choice. And for many, it was a kind of a work life balance. But actually, for some of them, it just didn't look attractive, it didn't look like much fun. So they didn't want to kind of carry on up through contrast, it actually was some of the men that I spoke to. So some of the men that I spoke to had decided not to carry on up, and they'd stepped away from the law, and they were doing different things. And actually, they, you know, spoke to me about how, you know, it was a real challenge for them to do that, and how they, you know, had lots of people that had kind of questioned the choices that they had made in a way that women didn't seem to, you know, struggle with that. And similarly, I spoke to some, you know, very senior male partners who, you know, had reached a point in their career, maybe their children kind of gone through university, and they decided to perhaps take a step back, and had really struggled with this idea of identity where their identity had been very much wrapped up in being a partner being a leader. And actually, the choice to step away was was much more difficult. So for me, this idea of choice is interesting. Because if you think about where we end up, so you end up with, you know, more men at the top than then than women. And within that you've probably got, you know, a cohort of men and women who are quite happy with the choices that they've made. They know what they're signing up to. They're getting well remunerated, let's be honest. And you know, and they're happy where they are. But you then get a chunk of women who say, well, actually, no, that's not for me, I'm going to stop here. And those choices aren't necessarily questioned or challenged, they can they can stay there and that's accepted. But you go and get some men who actually carry on up regardless of whether they think that's the right thing for them. So you end up with this, you know, disproportionate number at the top so the women stay down at the level that they stay in the men stay up. So, for me that's interesting, because I think you often try and solve inequality or inequity at the top by focusing On the women and thinking about, well, what can we do to make the women fit to make the women want to get up? Rather than challenging? Okay, well, what have we got at the top? And how can we reward different styles of leadership? So that actually, it becomes a choice that is more palatable to, to men and women. And I think that's something that we still, you know, we still struggle with, I think, in terms, and by implication, then it's the men that need to do more of the changing than the women, rather than thinking, Okay, we've got, we've got to coach women to be more adaptive into sort of more male centered behaviors is actually the other way around it. It's, it's how do we then make men change the culture of a business be more adaptive, be better allies, maybe for women and Dr. Equality that way? I think so. And one of the reflections, again, that I've had since writing the report, and you know, it's quite clear from the get go that, you know, are we treating the symptoms rather than the cause? And actually, the cause of, you know, the statistics that I found is cultural. And culture has an impact on many things, and on many people, and I think, you know, often when we talk about, you know, trying to get more women into leadership, I've, you know, spoken now at numerous events, and you know, the men are always absent from the conversation. And I think until we get the men into the conversation, things aren't going to change. And I'd love to hear from you actually, Ollie, because, you know, actually, you're one of the exceptions, because you do, I know, You've been to some of the events that I've spoken at. And this is something we've spoken about before. And I just wonder what we can do to get more men involved and more men, you know, interested in the conversation? It's a really, really big question. And it's a hard one, because the risk is that you have a cohort, or a generation of women who are exactly the same the right things, but they're saying them to the wrong people. And I think I think really, it's at the heart of it, it's bravery for men to say, you know, the route I've come and the world I currently inhabit, doesn't need to stay the same. And we can have equality at every single level of the organization and in every level of people's life, really, and design it that way to assume equality, rather than assume that a certain cohort or gender of people will adapt. So I think it's about making men braver, being more present in the conversation, and being more honest about whether or not you know, they've made the choice they really want to make. So Ali, it'd be interesting, because you obviously started life in a city firm. And, you know, we sit here and you know, you didn't and, again, make it is, it's perhaps not the right word, but you know, you made the choice to step out. And I'd just be interested to hear from you about, you know, the impact that, you know, when you took that choice, made that decision, you know, was it a difficult one for you? It was actually quite an easy one really, I found so, I went from law firm and became general counsel, and I, I didn't enjoy the work enough. And it was driven, it was driven, less less boy stepping out of, you know, the pressures of a career to just not enjoying the day to day. But the reason why I asked those questions around choices that I think I as a man and a father and a family man first felt I had little choice, have very few choices during my career. I, I always felt an expectation to be the breadwinner, and to be the one driving forward in my career, much to my wife's detriment, when we had it, we had a joke at dunnhumby which was my boss had to hide the wrong hand side because my, my wife is far cleverer and, and more driven than me. And I think it was because I was a man that I felt that obligation to have that career path. And, and it was to, as I say, was to my to my wife's detriment. So it was, you know, the stepping out came, if you like, really towards the end, when my kids were older, and I was, I was more able, and more if you'd like to settled in my, in my personal situation. But, but for me, my my, my career really, you know, has an emphasis of you Yeah, lack of choice all the way through that this is something I have to do. And would I have done the same thing if I really could have designed it myself, and I think I would have done something quite different. Just taking a quick break from Claire and Oliver's conversation to let you know that there is a way to find out more about the class of 2002 women in law report, you can download a copy for free at client talk.co.uk. back now to Claire and Oliver, I think, you know, one of the the reflections that I have from this series was when I was talking to Chris. And he mentioned about, you know, when he was at a crossroads in his career as a partner, he was able, almost with a blank sheet of paper, say, Look, this is what I think I can bring to the partnership. And, and, you know, he go, and I quite liked this idea of being able to have more control over your own path. Because I think, you know, in law firms there's, there's very much a sense of, if you want to be partner, you have to tick the right boxes, and you have to demonstrate the business case. And that's often comes back to fees and clients. But, you know, if you had to design your career, what would you have done differently? And what would the firm or company that you were in have had to have done to accommodate that. Really, with a blank sheet of paper, I think I would have designed it in a way that my wife and I were working the same amount and in the same way, with the same degree of success and same degree of responsibility. And both have had that opportunity to shine equally. And I think that that requires organizations back to how do we get this done. That requires organizations to accept that a a man's contribution or work style is probably the right. No insurer or white, right way to describe it is but the way the man works within an organization mirrors how their partner or women working in organizations, and the expectation is is less that they will be always on. But they will have the an equal share in the responsibilities to be at home and maybe sometimes not to be there. But again, I think we're quite a long way from organizations operating like that. But I think I think there's something in that that is really important to driving that equality that that is so important. One of the things I tried to do with the report was to really give my perspective as a coach, which, you know, you mentioned, what was the driver for the report, and, you know, a glass of wine and a chat with my husband was one of them. But actually one of the other drivers that I had was, you know, a coaching conversation that I had with a female leader who was really struggling with this idea of, you know, I don't fit the mold of a leader, how can I change to be this leader that I feel like I need to be and working with her to show her that, you know, actually what are you trying to achieve? And why do you have to achieve it in the same way as other people? You know, what, what do you bring and, you know, you can achieve the same results in a different way. And I think that as coaches, we often have conversations that, you know, we're lucky to have because we get insights into what's really going on inside people's minds in a way that you know, I think many don't. When you coach male leaders, do you think what you just described to me is unique to you? Or do you think actually a lot of men struggle with this notion of identity and you know, I have to be the breadwinner, and I have to keep on going up because that's what's expected of me. I think men struggle with that every day is something that's tolerated, as opposed to something that is openly discussed and that senior lawyers are driving to change. Now if I'm if I'm really honest. You know, I probably coach more women than men. And, you know, very broadly, a lot of the challenges that the women I coach face with are, are based from the fact that they They even though they might work in the same law firm, they work in, in quite a different, almost social environment to the their male counterparts. And so I think on the one hand, there's a generation of women who are really keen to deal with these sorts of challenges, yet there are not enough men who are aware and engaged in that in the debate that needs to happen to drive those changes. And what do you think we need to do to get those men engaged, have more conversations like this, open it out and bring men into the room, the danger of of it being a, there, I think there is a danger of it being a too much of a closed conversation need to bring this out and, and make men feel engaged in it, not threatened by it, but also able to have an honest conversation about it, you know, whenever there's an opportunity. And, I guess, kind of leading on from that. You know, one, you know, we're talking about, you know, lots of different things here. But, you know, the whole series has been about culture. And I think one of the challenges with firms with companies is, you know, changing culture is difficult, it takes time. And, you know, when we think about law firms in particular, you know, they are extremely profitable, the model works. From a profit perspective, it works for, you know, a large number of, as I said, you know, the many partners are happy with where they've got to, they're happy with their lifestyle, they've made choices that are very much in line with what they want. How do we, you know, let's, you know, let's take the billable hour, for example, which, you know, links back to some of the traits that I mentioned, it's, you know, been mentioned, you know, actually in different ways across the series as being something that is a challenge, you know, how do we get firms to think about changing the billable hour, when actually it works, and it has worked for, for so many for so long. And that's the challenge. If it, if it works for an organization or for an industry, there's a massive disincentive, there's no incentive for that to be changed. And if you've got people at the top, who are leading an organization that's always seen, through their, their careers, to make them change, that will be really tough. So it's going to, again, take a really brave organization, to, to make those sorts of changes. But maybe, maybe that's maybe that's, you know, align that bravery with the bravery of the way in which you, people can operate within the business, you know, maybe the two things go hand in hand. And maybe there's somebody somewhere or a firm somewhere who really stepped out and makes that change. I suppose the reality is, though, will that firm that does that, you know, from potentially an internal perspective, will they be able to meet client needs, externally? And will that be the inhibitor to make make those sorts of changes? I don't know. And it's interesting, because you mentioned clients, and, you know, Dan, kind of the voice of the client, again, on this series talking about how, you know, the billable hour is something that many clients don't like? Because actually, you know, it rewards inefficiency. You know, no one likes to be told, Well, you know, how long is it gonna take? Well, you know, who knows, but that's, this is what we're going to charge per hour. And actually, it's interesting when I talk to firms, often there's your two conversations running in parallel. So on the one hand, well, actually clients, we recognize that clients don't like the billable hour, we actually do most things on a fixed fee basis. We want to embrace technology, we want to reward efficiency, we want our people to be mentally and physically happy and healthy. And get on the other side, there seems to be a real reluctance to get rid of the billable hour because actually, it's an easy measure of productivity. It's an easy way for us to be able to manage our systems internally. And almost a you know, closed off to well, there must be another way to be able to manage our people and to manage whether our people are being you know, as productive and as efficient as possible without having the billable hour there. Maybe it is the case Claire that that confronting the billable hour challenge, will enable businesses to completely rethink their business models, how they manage their resources, their people. And, you know, that can be the driver of really the modernisation of the law firms. Because, you know, we hear so much from guests that that things are stuck and changes required. Maybe that's the starting point. Maybe that's the discussion that we need to open out, that if we go from challenging billable hours, that means we can we can deal with this always on culture, we can we can deal with the inequalities with the the out the the inevitable outcome of losing all this great talent through through careers. You know, maybe there's really something in that. Yeah. And I think, you know, as we come to a close with this series, you know, perhaps thinking about the billable hour, and how can it be done differently, is a great topic for for next series. Let's do that. Let's get leaders in. I think we need to get clients in as well, and have a really serious conversation about is this the right way forward for clients, businesses, for people coming through for future lawyers, because if that's an inhibitor to change, all the changes that we so often hear needs to be made in the industry will be prevented. Sounds like a really exciting topic. I've really enjoyed doing this series. With you, Ali. We've had some fantastic guests as always, and I'm really looking forward to digging into the billable hour next time. Absolutely. Claire, You're a legend as always, and great working with it. Now with Claire rason and Oliver Hansard, bringing season six of the lawyers coach podcast to a close. If you've enjoyed this, then please rate on your podcast provider so that others can find it. It's also well worth checking out the previous five series of the podcast where the themes have been empathy, success, law 2.0 beyond law and the skills lawyers need. If you are a lawyer and would like to take part in lawyers coach then please visit our website lawyer coach.co.uk For further details, and you can also join the conversation on our LinkedIn group. Morris coach. Thanks for listening and goodbye